Request for approval: EUPL (European Union Public Licence)

[Bruce Perens]

Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> A translation error is entirely realistic.
Unfortunately, there were complaints of legally-significant translation 
differences in the European Interoperability Framework 1.0 document, 
another IDABC product, made by some of the same people, with somewhat 
similar intent. For this reason, it's a good idea to be very careful 
with translations. This is not to disparage IDABC or its staff, they are 
admirable people and definitely want to do the right thing.

>> Convince me.  Real cases, rather than fevered sophomoric imaginings 
>> would be a help.
The significant difference between copyright and moral right regimes, 
both represented in the EU.

A license doesn't mean anything without the context of a body of law. 
And thus the choice of law is as important as any text in the license. 
But since OSI can not practically get into the business of evaluation of 
national law, it would be better to require that licenses do not specify 
choice of law.

Matthew, your sentiment about China and general distrust of governments 
has my sympathy but is going far afield of what will win an argument here.
> More importantly, you are ignoring the real issue.  No OSI-approved 
> license has a contact info requirement.
I didn't hear anyone proposing to certify this license as it currently 
stands, due to more than one clear problem already acknowledged here. 
IMO it has to be taken up with IDABC.

    Bruce